Issue of the Week: Expanding the Questionable School Voucher Program
Plus Hero and Jerk of the Week
After all, researchers from the University of Arkansas found that students in the voucher program aren’t performing any better than their peers in Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS).
Same goes for Milwaukee’s charter school students, according to a new report from the same research team.
So why would Gov.-elect Scott Walker and Republican legislators want to expand the voucher program, originally intended for low-income students in the city, to other cities across Wisconsin?
Why would the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC), according to an internal strategy memo, push to expand the program to all students, regardless of their family’s income?
Money, plain and simple. Taxpayer money, to be exact.
Private schools—including religious schools—want their hands on taxpayer money.
The business community wants to get its hands on that money, too. In fact, MMAC is considering becoming a chartering agency, according to its strategy memo.
Conservative politicians—who hold public office but don’t believe in government—want the support of religious conservatives and the business community. So, they want to privatize education, just like they want to privatize other government functions.
But when you get down to it, Milwaukee’s voucher school students aren’t doing any better, on average, then their public school peers despite the fact that there is a self-selection process to get into a voucher school. In fact, once the school year gets under way, voucher students are more likely to transfer back to an MPS school than the other way around.
So if legislators and the MMAC are really concerned about education, they should take the time to actually read the research studies rather than rely on their right-wing ideological positions. Children’s lives and futures depend on their education. These ideologues need to ask: Are we really serving our kids by experimenting with their education? Because if they ask the researchers, they’ll find that voucher students aren’t any better off than MPS students, period.
Event of the Week
‘Celebrating’
Scott Walker’s Inauguration
We should be grateful that the transfer of power in the United
States is peaceful after every election, no matter how contentious a campaign
may be. But that doesn’t mean that new administrations—including the incoming
Scott Walker administration—are always accountable to the people. That’s why
Milwaukee’s workers and jobless individuals will travel to Madison on
Inauguration Day to ask Scott Walker to remember the jobs crisis in Milwaukee
and make good on his campaign promise to create 250,000 jobs in his first term.
The coalition sponsoring the prayer service and rally at the Capitol—Citizen
Action of Wisconsin, Good Jobs and Livable Neighborhoods, MICAH, the League of
Young Voters and the Milwaukee Area Labor Council—will provide buses on Monday,
Jan. 3, which will leave from the Talgo parking lot at 27th and Hopkins streets
at 6:30 a.m. and return to Milwaukee by 4 p.m. For more information, call
207-8165.
Heroes of the Week
City on a Hill Staff and Volunteers
As the
percentage of Milwaukeeans living below the poverty line increases, the staff
and volunteers at City on a Hill (2224 W. Kilbourn Ave.) remain steadfast in
their efforts to “reduce poverty, strengthen families and foster racial
reconciliation.” The faith-based nonprofit offers a multitude of programs to
educate and empower both children and adults, including parenting classes, a
pregnancy counseling center, summer camps, a health clinic and community
mobilization events.
City on a
Hill relies on a cadre of volunteers to fulfill its mission of enacting
positive social change. Readers who wish to donate or volunteer are encouraged
to visit www.cityonahillmilwaukee.org to learn about the many opportunities
available.
Jerk of the Week
State Sen. Glenn
Grothman (R-West Bend)
Bah, humbug! That’s Sen. Glenn Grothman’s response to the
welcome news that the Wisconsin State Plan Amendment has been approved by the
feds. The amendment raises the income level for free family-planning services
under Medicaid to 300% of the federal poverty level (about $32,000 annually)
for both men and women. That’s a very good thing, especially during a
recession, when paying for birth control and other reproductive health services
can be difficult. It’ll also save money in the long run, since fewer
financially struggling men and women will have unwanted pregnancies, abortions
or health-sapping STDs. But Grothman isn’t happy about this turn of events. No,
not Grothman. The ultraconservative state senator, who consistently opposes any
sort of pro-birth-control measure, will do what he can to “pare back” the
program so that fewer individuals will be covered.
The voucher system is intended for motivated students with repsponsible parents. Pay no attention to studies done by a liberal university. Students that transfer back to MPS are the ones that can't hack it in the private schools. Either they are too unprepared or unruly. Vouchers for the good students is a good thing. We will always MPS to house the bad students as a way of keeping them from distracting the good ones. This is one area that even responsibleliberals agree with conservities. The repsonsible liberals love their kids like all good parents and don't want the associating with a bad element. A religious school is a better alternative than sending their kids to MPS where hard core gang bangers arrive every day, armed to the teeth, high on drugs, and terrorizing students, teachers, and principals.
I would throw my hat in the democrat circle but am a full proponent of the voucher system. MPS is a failing school system and one should not be forced into sending their child into it if won't support their child's educational rearing. The school system should work for the child and parents. Not the other way around. Under no circumstances should parents be forced to pay twice for their children's education. The money should follow the student.
Aside from the excellent point of segregating those whose parents are involved from those whose parent(s) don't care, there are other elements at play here. One of them is simply the money, the other is about "indoctrination", whether liberal or conservative.
I've heard a prediction that the Obama administration's next move should be reform of education, but what does that mean? I see 3 major angles in that...
The Wisconsin problem, the School Funding formula. Is it right to use money from affluent areas to support depressed areas? Will the debate have a different outcome if race is considered or not? School performance. NCLB was approached like a corporate mandate, succeed or get less money. But, we all know that reliable results can only be achieved when the incoming "raw materials" are consistent, are the students starting at the same level? Do they have a future to look forward to? Funding for post-secondary education. Are student loans being put on the same course as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac? In housing, the "government guarantee" was (wrongly?) extended to 7, 5, and then 2-year balloon notes. Purpose of which may have been to accelerate housing starts (true jobs) by allowing more decaying area homeowners to make their move to the growth areas, also providing a way to keep the price up when selling that decaying area home. Never mind the Clinton-era surface argument of putting more minorities in homes. -- Are "government guaranteed" Sallie Mae loans to students of purely privatized schools like Kaplan going to fail in the same way as housing? Just a way to steer more taxpayer money to private, for profit organizations? -- You value schools like UWM and MATC, both run by government. You value schools like Marquette, non-government, but started by charitable religious groups. Would you seriously hire someone from Kaplan, Bryant and Stratton, Georgia High Tech, Univ. of Phoenix, or Devry?As much as the loss of factory jobs has been covered by telling people to get an education and get an office job, do people take note of how hard private business has also been working to eliminate the office jobs? First the indirect factory and office support workers by making the managers and direct laborers do their own bureaucratic, formerly secretarial functions, then by doing those functions electronically, at a distance, no more need for that job to even be in the US.
Considering that, do we even want to educate everyone? We wanted to educate our workers, but do we really want to educate people targeted to be no more than consumers and voters? Think about that! Will it all last?
Most people I know send their kids to private schools and are not getting any kind of tax break for doing so. I admire these parents because they are making a financial sacrifice for their kids.
In some countries primary education is all private and college is free. I think we need to switch to that kind of system. Its unfair to pay property tax and private school tuition.
Still from my experience, good kids will learn despite having poor teachers in the public system. But when you mix bad teachers with bad students - the outcome will be bad.